Abstract
The complex social organizations, which can self-organize into the region “at the edge of chaos”, neither too ordered nor too random, now have become an interdisciplinary research topic. As a kind of special social organization, the complex military organization usually has its key entities and relations, which should be well protected in case of attacks. In order to do the criticality analysis for the military organization, finding the key entities or relations which can disrupt the functions of the organization, two problems should be seriously considered. First, the military organization should be well modeled, which can work well in the specialized military context; secondly it is critical to define and identify the key entities or relations, which should incorporate the topological centrality and weighted nodes or edges.
Different from the traditional military organizations which are usually task-oriented, this paper proposes the Force, Intelligence, Networking, and C2 Extended (FINC-E) Model for complex military organization, with which a more detailed and quantitative analysis for the military organization is available. This model provides the formal representation for the nodes and edges in the military organization, which provides a highly efficient and concise network topology. In order to identify the critical nodes and edges, a method based on key potential is proposed, which acts as the measurement of criticality for the heterogeneous nodes and edges in the complex military organization. The key potential is well defined on the basis of topology structure and of the node’s or edge’s capability, which helps to transform the organization from the heterogeneity to the homogeneity. In the end, the criticality analysis case study is made for both small-world networked military organization and scale-free networked military organization, showing that the measure of key potential has the advantage over other classical measures in locating the key entities or relations for complex military organization.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Albert R, Barabási A-L (2002) Statistical mechanics of complex networks. Rev Mod Phys 74:47–97
Alberts DS (2011) The agility advantages: a survival guide for complex enterprises and endeavors. CCRP publication series. COCR, Washington
Alberts DS, Garstka JJ, Hayes RE, Signori DA (2001) Understanding information age warfare. CCRP publication series. COCR, Washington
Alexei S, Sybert, HS (2011) An agent-based approach for structured modelling, analysis and improvement of safety culture. Comput Math Organ Theory 17(1):77–117
Al-Mannai W, Lewis TG (2007) Minimizing network risk with application to critical infrastructure protection. J Inf Warf 6(2):52–68
Bollobás B, Riordan O (2003) Robustness and vulnerability of scale-free random graphs. Internet Math 1(1):1–35
Borgatti SP (2006) Identifying sets of key players in a social network. Comput Math Organ Theory 12(1):21–34
Brin S, Page L (1998) The anatomy of a large scale hypertextual web search engine. Comput Netw ISDN Syst 30(1–7):107–117
Cares J (2005) Distributed networked operations. Alidade Press, Newport
Carley KM, Krackhardt D (1999) A typology for C2 measures. In: Proceedings of the 1999 International Symposium on Command and Control Research and Technology. Naval War, College, Newport, Rhode Island
Carley KM, Lee JS, Krackhardt D (2001) Destabilizing networks. Connections 24(3):31–34
Carley KM, Reminga J, Kamneva N (2003) Destabilizing terrorist networks. In: Proceedings of the 2003 NAACSOS conference, Pittsburgh
Carley KM et al (2006) Modelling community containment for pandemic influenza: a letter report. National Academy Press, Washington
Chen DB, Lü LY et al (2012) Identifying influential nodes in complex networks. Physica A 391(4):1777–1787
Christopher EH, Marge, B.H. (2010) Hiding in plain sight: criminal network analysis. Comput Math Organ Theory 16(1):89–111
Cohen RE, Ben-Avraham KD, Havlin S (2001) Breakdown of the Internet under intentional attack. Phys Rev Lett 86(16):3682–3685
Dekker AH (2001) C4ISR architectures: social network analysis and the FINC methodology: an experiment in military organization structure. Internal report DSTO-GD-0313, archived at: http://www.acm.org/~dekker/FINCX
Dekker AH (2002) Applying social network analysis concepts to military C4ISR architectures. Connections 24(3):93–103
Dekker AH (2005a) C4ISR, the FINC methodology, and operations in urban terrain. J. Battlefield Technol. 8(1)
Dekker AH (2005b) Network topology and military performance. In: MODSIM 2005 international congress on modelling and simulation. pp 2174–2180. Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand
Dekker AH (2006) Studying organizational topology with simple computational models. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 10(46)
Gilles RP, Chakrabarti S, Sarangi S, Badasyan N (2006) Critical agents in networks. Math Soc Sci 52(3):302–310
Gómez D et al (2003) Centrality and power in social networks: a game theoretic approach. Math Soc Sci 46(1):27–54
Hayes RE (2012) Measuring command and control (C2) effectiveness. In: MORS workshop-joint framework for measuring C2 effectiveness, Laurel, MD
Holme P, Kim BJ, Yoon CN, Han SK (2002) Attack vulnerability of complex networks. Phys Rev E, Stat Nonlinear Soft Matter Phys 65(5):056109
Hu J et al (2010) Topological potential: modelling node importance with activity and local effect in complex networks. In: Proceedings of the 2010 second international conference on computer modelling and simulation, Sanya, Hainan
Hu, Xf (2006) War complexity and war gaming & simulation in the information age. J Syst Simul 18(12)
Jin WX (2009) Research of simulation on the combat SoS complex network. Syst Simul Technol Appl 11(3):311–319
Johnson R (2007) Dynamic complexity in system of systems. Internal report of Engineering & Technology Advanced Systems, The Boeing Company
Krackhardt D, Carley KM (1998) A PCANS model of structure in organization. In: Proceedings of the 1998 international symposium on command and control research and technology, Monterray, CA
Lewis TG (2006) Critical infrastructure protection in homeland security: defending a networked nation. Wiley, Aoboken
Matthias M, Michael, AZ, Carley, KM (2011) Measuring CMOT’s intellectual structure and its development. Comput Math Organ Theory 17(1):1–34
Paul O, Rich C (2007) Cascades of failure and extinction in evolving complex systems. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 9(4)
Yang GL et al (2011) Attack strategy for operation system of systems based on FINC-e model and edge key potential. In: IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, Anchorage, Alaska
Zemanová L, Zhou C, Kurths J (2006) Structural and functional clusters of complex brain networks. Physica D 224(1–2):202–212
Zemanová L, Zhou C, Kurths J (2010) Cortical hubs form a module for multisensory integration on top of the hierarchy of cortical networks. Front Neuroinf 4(1):1–13
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yang, G., Zhang, W., Xiu, B. et al. Key potential-oriented criticality analysis for complex military organization based on FINC-E model. Comput Math Organ Theory 20, 278–301 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-013-9163-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-013-9163-0